HomeMy WebLinkAboutPZ Minutes 4-28-14Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-28-14
City of Lake Elmo
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of April 28, 2014
Chairman Williams called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at
7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Williams, Dodson, Kreimer, Haggard, Yocum, Dorschner
and Lundgren.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Larson and Morreale.
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Klatt and City Planner Johnson
Approve Agenda:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
Approve Minutes: April 14, 2014
Chairman Williams noted three corrections to the minutes.
There was a general discussion of the minute-taking procedures.
M/S/P: Williams/Dorschner, move to approve the minutes as amended, Vote: 7-0,
motion carried unanimously.
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit – Verizon Wireless Communications Tower
Klatt began is presentation be describing the request. The proposed 125’ monopole
tower would be located at Oakland Jr. High School at Manning Ave. N. and 10th St. N.
Klatt described the exact location of where the proposed tower would be located. Klatt
then presented the detailed plans for the tower, noting that the site would be fenced in
for safety purposes. Moving forward, Klatt explained the require ments of the City’s
ordinance, including the proof of need, site ranking requirements, expert review, and
other requirements. Kyle also noted that the City’s consulting engineer, Gary Lysiak of
Owl Engineering, is also in attendance to answer any technical questions.
Haggard asked who would receive financial compensation for the lease agreement for
the tower. Klatt noted that the school district would receive compensation.
Gary Lysiak, Owl Engineering, explained his review procedure to the Planning
Commission. He noted that a search of existing towers in the areas was completed, and
2
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-28-14
it was found that no existing structures in the area could accommodate the need of the
proposed tower. Lysiak added that there is no negative impact on the operation of Lake
Elmo Airport. He also analyzed the proposed pole for loading capabilities, so future
facilities can be sited on the proposed tower. Lysiak wrapped up by noting that the
proposed tower will not cause any safety or health concerns related to radiation.
The Planning Commission asked various technical questions about the operation of the
tower and the site itself.
Blake Conklin, representing Verizon Wireless, requested that condition #4 of the
approval be removed, as it is not practical.
Dennis Bloom, Director of Operation of Stillwater Area Public Schools, addressed site-
related questions. He addressed the safety concerns of the baseballs entering the
fenced in portion of the cell tower. He also noted that additional landscaping is not
necessary. Bloom wrapped up by noting that the school district has other properties
with monopole wireless towers and the district has not experienced any problems
related to the operations of these facilities.
Public Hearing opened at 7:54 pm.
No one spoke. No written comments were submitted.
Public Hearing closed at 7:55 pm.
Chairman Williams asked planning staff about omitting Condition #4. Klatt explained
that the purpose of the condition is to not prohibit the siting of future carriers on the
site. There was a general discussion about the location of the equipment shelter. Klatt
noted that the siting of a future accessory building or equipment would not require an
amendment to the conditional use permit.
M/S/P: Dorschner/Dodson, move to approve the Conditional Use Permit to site a 125-
foot monopole wireless communications tower at Oakland Jr. High School based on the
findings of fact listed in the Staff Report and the conditions in the staff report with
amendment to condition #4, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously.
M/S/P: Williams/Lundgren, move to amend the previous motion to include the findings
of fact listed in the staff report and the conditions in the staff report, including the
report from Owl Engineering, Vote: 7-0, motion carried unanimously.
Business Item: Shoreland Ordinance Update
Johnson presented information concerning a proposed update to the City’s Shoreland
Management zoning ordinance. He noted that with recent updates to the City Code to
3
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-28-14
add sewered zoning districts in the City, the Shoreland Ordinance needs to be updated
to address these new districts. Staff is recommending adopting ordinances similar to
those is surrounding communities, which will generally separate the City into sewered
and unsewered development areas.
Johnson reviewed the purpose and intent of shoreland regulations, and described the
terminology used for these ordinances. He stated that all construction and
development activities within shoreland zones are subject to these special shoreland
rules.
Johnson reviewed the content of the proposed ordinance, and discussed the proposed
changes that are being recommended by Staff. The ordinance does provide for
flexibility from the state rules to allow for development around certain lakes in
exchange for riparian dedication to the City of a 200 foot buffer around these lakes.
Lundgren questioned whether or not the City would require the dedication of existing
property that has already been platted. Johnson noted that the ordinance would only
apply to new developments and does require implementation of a buffer in existing
developments.
Williams asked for clarification concerning the riparian dedication and non -riparian
dedication lots. Johnson replied that there is a setback of 50 feet for lots adjacent to an
area dedicated for riparian purposes. The Commission generally discussed the
implications of the riparian setbacks, and suggested changes to clarify the intent of the
code.
Lundgren requested that Staff look into regulations concerning the dumping of lawn
clippings, leaves, and other materials into lakes. Klatt stated that it would be covered
under DNR regulations.
The Commission discussed whether or not other lakes should be included in the riparian
dedication requirements. Johnson noted that Staff would research other lakes that
should be subject to the riparian dedication requirements. Staff will be meeting with
the DNR and will be asking for an update to the classifications.
The Commission felt that it would be helpful to include definitions in t he code, but
would still like to see the definitions in the definitions section.
The Commission felt comfortable with the code with the changes discussed and asked
to bring it to public hearing.
Business Item: AUAR Update
4
Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 4-28-14
Klatt explained the current status of the Alternative Urban Area-wide Review for the
Village Area. The AUAR was adopted in 2009 and is valid for 5-years. As no changes or
development have occurred in the Village as of May 2014, staff is proposing to submit a
technical memorandum update that would extend the validity of the AUAR.
Updates and Concerns
Council Updates – April 15, 2014 Meeting - None
Staff Updates
1. Staff engaged in a general discussion about density calculations with the
Planning Commission. Staff would like to adopt a formal definition into the Code
so that the same methodology is used moving forward. Johnson distributed 2
handouts to the Planning Commission, one an email back from the Met Council
and the other an excerpt from a Planners dictionary which gave real world
examples. The way Cities calculate net densities greatly varies. Klatt used Easton
village as an example. The Commission asked that staff research how other
Cities calculate net density and bring it back to a future meeting.
2. Upcoming Meetings
a. May 12, 2014
b. May 28, 2014 – Wednesday due to Memorial Day holiday
Commission Concerns -
The Planning Commission discussed whether or not to include further detail about the
dissenting vote. They felt that if there was a no vote, the reasons should be stated if
desired.
Dodson noted a concern about the utility of the City’s design standards manual. He
noted that there is not a strong enough tool to require the applicant or developer to
change the architectural designs of the building.
Meeting adjourned at 9:35pm
Respectfully submitted,
Joan Ziertman
Planning Program Assistant